🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges related to his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to reporters.

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his party members.

Background of the Case

The entire episode began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her account was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

The defense also attempted to question the reliability of Khan and her aides, who provided testimony.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is notable as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—allegations that the government have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's present legislature, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.